Anybody know this speedster?

Don't know the car but the side view of this Vintage Speedster reinforces my complaint about Kirk/VS not being able to do a better job at trying to center the front axle/wheel placement in the body front fender arch. 

I have a 2000 VS and its not as bad as this, but the front axle and front wheels are still positioned relatively rearward of the body front wheel arch.  I mean after 15 plus years couldn't he iterate the front axle placement towards the front of the car maybe just a few mms a year to hit center target. 

I remember before I bought mine, I met with Kirk and was talking with him about a build and I mention this very thing, and he said that yes he could move the front axle a little more forward if I wanted.  First I felt great because Kirk was willing to build a car the way I wanted.  But then I thought, hey am I the only one that am able to see this glaring issue ?  Has nobody ever brought this issue up before ?

Listen, I know we all love it and accept Kirk and the cars he makes for a relatively inexpensive price . . . but really.

Just my thoughts.  Other that that, and the price, I like this white one if I was in the market.

Grant

"Listen, I know we all love it and accept Kirk and the cars he makes for a relatively inexpensive price . . . but really"

Apparently the price justifies the goods(?).....he gets away with it AND either does NOT recognize the short comings in his design/execution of the BUILD....OR.....does not care. In any case, the buying public has enabled these SNAFUS that have some of you "STEAMIN". Would be nice for all for this to get better.....hope it does

Hello Ryan:

It's a pisser right ?  But when you're in your car you forget all about it.  It goes away for the most part.

Then there are those times, when I am coming up on my car parked somewhere appreciating it form a distance, and it sticks out (almost as much as the black windshield wipers) and says "hello". 

Then you turn the key, hear the engine, and it goes away again. 

The angle of the camera to the car matters a lot, as does the depth at which the tire sits inside the wheel well. And if the wheels are turned a little....well.

I doubt any VS wheel placement is very much different from any other.

But the fix is pretty straightforward: Buy a half dozen sets of caster shims and two sets of longer beam bolts. Unbolt your steering shaft at the rag joint. Unbolt your beam. Put a set of shims on the top beam and three on the bottom, bolt it up and see how it looks. Repeat with different shim sets until it's good. Always make sure the bottom beam sticks out a little more than the top.

When the beam is situated right and the wheels are centered in the holes, measure the gap (if any) where your steering shaft meats the steering box. You're probably going to have to either adjust your column down to meet it (there's usually like an inch of wiggle room) or  weld in an extension there. Figure that out now.

Then put it all back the way it was and take the shim sets to a machine shop. Tell them you want four slugs of mild steel done up exactly like the stacks-o-shims you have in your hands. Give them a hundred bucks and a cheap sixer. Something like that. Maybe a scosh more if you need them to make something to extend your steering shaft.

Wait.

When they are done, pick up your parts.

Weld the extensions to the beam.

Bolt your beam back in using your long bolts. (Or weld it! Strength!)

Rejoice in the fact that you have just spent time and treasure fixing something that not one person in a thousand would ever have noticed.

Be The Madness! 

Banzai...you got me confused... here you say you have a tough time tolerating "ALMOST PERFECTION to accept half assed, carelessly planned, negligent oversight" but on another post you said that carburetor flat spots  were acceptable and we all should learn to live with that....Please explain. I know you will have something to say about it.....Bruce

aircooled posted:

Banzai...you got me confused... here you say you have a tough time tolerating "ALMOST PERFECTION to accept half assed, carelessly planned, negligent oversight" but on another post you said that carburetor flat spots  were acceptable and we all should learn to live with that....Please explain. I know you will have something to say about it.....Bruce

YES SIR..more than happy to: "I" NEED to because my 11 year old WEBERS have some small air leaks. My mechanic offered to remedy them with a pair of NEW PMOs for $7000 or $4500 to rebuild the WEBERS. WEBERS almost always, over time, develop these leaks around bushings, etc that CAN cause flat spots......TINY flat spots! I'm NOT of the mindset to drop some large BUCKAGE at the moment...... More than happy to RETRACT the "WE" and substitute "ME" in that I NEED to learn to live with that.

When PMO came out with their CARBS, they eliminated ALL of the short comings in design and engineering of WEBERS except that some FOLKS are hung up on the WEBER name....despite the fact that PMO is largely a SUPERIOR product. SO....its "ME" that has accepted these flat spots....YESSIR...MY PROBLEM..MY CHOICE and my mechanic thinks that I should keep the WEBERS for originality/historic purposes and allow him and EUROMETRIX to rebuild/rebush/remachine my WEBERS!

But....if I may BEG for mercy....the flat spots are almost negligible and small...but THEY ARE THERE...much to my CHAGRIN

Bill Prout posted:

I have had a bit of a hard time accepting that CARBS on a 2.7 will NEVER be as smooth as electronic fuel injection.....the technology is plainly incapable which has also forced my acceptance of the air leaks. Just need to get past it and embrace the WEBERS as they are.

In my DEFENSE guys....a bit of flat spot is DIFFERENT than delivering a new car WITHOUT SEATBELTS, or WITHOUT a fully attached SHIFT LINKAGE, OR doing a thorough TEST DRIVE of a NEW vehicle.

Cool car! I'm guessing price might be set to give 'seller' wiggle room in negotiating. Also, if a 'buyer' is influenced by "the-heart-wants-what-the-heart-wants", then any given price can almost always be justified in that buyer's mind (I think most of us have been there at some point).

In the K.I.S.S. world of Musbjim, every day is a gift! Life is complicated enough (family, health & well-being, food on the table & a roof over our head) without creating angst over the 'small stuff' on a hobby car (aside from safety issues). If the car, or whatever hobby, affords you some form of joy, then appreciate & enjoy the moment as well as the other gifts in your life.  

I'm sure the next owner of that Speedster will enjoy it as we all enjoy our own and subsequently be consumed by 'The Madness'. 

Need to add TAX/SHIPPING...and PAY my mechanic to do the switch with NEW linkage, gaskets, tuneup, etc....so we are talking $3200 to EURO for full micrometer/one thousandth of an inch rebuild, another $300 for new linkages/gaskets/etc. and then LABOR to the MAN....$1000. It is way beyond the scope of a me-do-it effort.

MUSBJIM suggests,"the heart wants what the heart wants"....indeed he is correct. I fell in love with the IM6 and bought it despite the fact that it had a few PIMPLES ON ITS ASS.

Stan Galat posted:

What a great attitude!

I can't do it.

STAN...as I said, my WEBERS are leaking a bit and i've been told that the very "minor almost negligible" flat spots are due to this issue. I chose to NOT buy the new PMOs, that which is on the 2.7 that you drove.....the leaks and worn bushings, etc PREVENT a perfect tune. I'll live with it....and with the SHAME of a flat spot.

 

I'm pretty sure the procedure Ed describes for centering the wheels in the wheel wells is the reason Vintage Speedsters will never have front wheels that are exactly centered.

Never, ever.

If it takes ten more minutes or ten more dollars, the elves in Kirk's little workshop ain't bothering.

But then, I'm also pretty sure that no one who's come rushing up to tell me what a cool car that is has ever stopped in their tracks and said, "Ohmigod, what's wrong with those front wheels?"

I've never lost any sleep over the wheels. I've never painted my black windshield wiper arms silver. I've never bothered replacing the VS badge on the front handle with a genuine Porshee one.

Like Jim says, life has always found other stuff for me to worry about more than stuff like that.

 SpeedsterTrees01

Attachments

Photos (2)
MusbJim posted:

 

In the K.I.S.S. world of Musbjim, every day is a gift! Life is complicated enough (family, health & well-being, food on the table & a roof over our head) without creating angst over the 'small stuff' on a hobby car (aside from safety issues). If the car, or whatever hobby, affords you some form of joy, then appreciate & enjoy the moment as well as the other gifts in your life.  

 

 Amen Jim!

I have trouble spending anything north of $30k on a replica, any replica. But that’s me. 

I say the car is worth whatever you want to spend and whatever brings you happiness.  I’m a thrifty person (ie cheap). Therefore the “deal” I got on my speedster is factored in to my level of enjoyment-in my sick brain. 

I have a VS and actually haven’t spent any attention to the wheel location in the wheel well opening. Actually, that’s incorrect.  When I was looking at purchasing a speedster, those with IRS or wider wheels bothered me; as I preferred the wheels set in like the original. So I gave up handling in favor or appearance. 

Banzai Pipeline posted:

When PMO came out with their CARBS, they eliminated ALL of the short comings in design and engineering of WEBERS except that some FOLKS are hung up on the WEBER name....despite the fact that PMO is largely a SUPERIOR product. SO....its "ME" that has accepted these flat spots....YESSIR...MY PROBLEM..MY CHOICE and my mechanic thinks that I should keep the WEBERS for originality/historic purposes and allow him and EUROMETRIX to rebuild/rebush/remachine my WEBERS!

I don't quite get this. 6 cylinder Porsches only had Webers on the 2.0 liter from 1965 to 1969. The 2.2 had Zeniths, as did the 2.4(some racing engines had Webers, but most were MFI). The 2.7 never had Webers, it had MFI then CIS/K -Jetronic. To what originality/historic purposes are you speaking? Is your 2.7 in a 911?

DannyP posted:
Banzai Pipeline posted:

When PMO came out with their CARBS, they eliminated ALL of the short comings in design and engineering of WEBERS except that some FOLKS are hung up on the WEBER name....despite the fact that PMO is largely a SUPERIOR product. SO....its "ME" that has accepted these flat spots....YESSIR...MY PROBLEM..MY CHOICE and my mechanic thinks that I should keep the WEBERS for originality/historic purposes and allow him and EUROMETRIX to rebuild/rebush/remachine my WEBERS!

I don't quite get this. 6 cylinder Porsches only had Webers on the 2.0 liter from 1965 to 1969. The 2.2 had Zeniths, as did the 2.4(some racing engines had Webers, but most were MFI). The 2.7 never had Webers, it had MFI then CIS/K -Jetronic. To what originality/historic purposes are you speaking? Is your 2.7 in a 911?

YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT: My mechanic was largely referring to the HOT RODDING/RACING and aftermarket management of 2.7. The literature points to many dumping the FUEL INJECTION because it was NEVER performance oriented and folks got MORE horse power with WEBERS......a GOOGLE SEARCH on this which I have done a number of times refers to almost ALL of the horse power upgrades come along with WEBERS: BUT YOU ARE CORRECT about FACTORY ORIGINALITY and I stand corrected (thank you)

Porsche 911 Performance Handbook - Page 142 - Google Books Result

Bruce Anderson - 1996 - ‎Transportation
The only racing car that Porsche ever built that used CIS injection was the 934 ... of the 2.7 engine we must replace the CIS-injection system with either Weber ...

Flat Sixy: The Evolution of Porsche 911 Engine Size, Technology, and ...

blog.caranddriver.com › News › 'Featured'
 
Dec 13, 2013 - A detailed look at how the Porsche 911's signature flat-six engine has evolved over the ... The 911T continues to use Weber carburetors. ... A KKK turbocharger fitted to the 2.7-liter flat-six boosts output to a healthy 234 .... The bigger improvements come from the Carrera S, which utilizes a larger, 3.8-liter ...

Porsche Carrera: The Air-Cooled Era, 1953-1998 - Google Books Result

Johnny Tipler - 2014 - ‎Transportation
... with Weber carburettors, but could be specified with a Bosch fuelinjection system. ... parts and bag yourself a class win at Le Mans, as Erwin Kremer did in 1970.' And there's no doubt that the 2.7 Carrera RS owes much to the precedents set ... It's forty years since the RennSport badge first adornedPorsche's topline 911, ...
My 2.7 is in my IM6...motor was built by SUPERTEC PERFORMANCE(CA) in 2008/210 HP as part of the original Intermeccanica build specs along with 915 tranny and 911 suspension/brakes/etc.
MusbJim posted:

Cool car! I'm guessing price might be set to give 'seller' wiggle room in negotiating. Also, if a 'buyer' is influenced by "the-heart-wants-what-the-heart-wants", then any given price can almost always be justified in that buyer's mind (I think most of us have been there at some point).

In the K.I.S.S. world of Musbjim, every day is a gift! Life is complicated enough (family, health & well-being, food on the table & a roof over our head) without creating angst over the 'small stuff' on a hobby car (aside from safety issues). If the car, or whatever hobby, affords you some form of joy, then appreciate & enjoy the moment as well as the other gifts in your life.  

I'm sure the next owner of that Speedster will enjoy it as we all enjoy our own and subsequently be consumed by 'The Madness'. 

Thank you Sensei for again putting things in perspective... but the car would look cooler if the white wheels were wide 5s.

I have plenty of books as well, but all the info for these posts came from the Porsche 911 Red Book, by Patrick Paternie. Sorry to disagree, Banzai, but MFI is very tunable, if you know how. It makes the same power or better than carbs and has OMG instantaneous throttle response. The best I've ever experienced, bar none. Think about it, with carbs the venturi and fuel discharge are in the way of the air, not so on MFI. And it's sequential to valve opening, ahead of it's time really. The 2.7 RS and 2.8 short stroke RSR both had MFI.

People remove MFI and put carbs in because it's easier, sometimes cheaper($$re-bush throttle bodies & rebuild injection pumps$$), and they simply don't understand MFI.

CIS requires too many compromises with respect to heads/cam/valves for a racecar. I was simply referring to factory issue regular 911s.

My favorite engine is a twin plug MFI high compression 2.7 with S cams. Easy 250 horses or more. As far as I'm concerned, the last 911 was made in 1973. Long hoods RULE!

So let me get this straight: you're concerned  about originality/history when you've got a hot-rodded flat six in a replica of a car that never had a six? Ironic.

"So let me get this straight: you're concerned  about originality/history when you've got a hot-rodded flat six in a replica of a car that never had a six? Ironic."

IF I may offer an explanation: for whatever reason, as you have suggested, WEBERS or carbs became a favored choice in the 70s after the factory MFI cars either proved TOO DIFFICULT for the average garage techie to tune OR was a cheaper pursuit. It appears that you have the savvy and skill to achieve what others could not back in the 70s. It appears that a whole bunch of guys were into the 2.7RS setup and went with WEBERS. Whether easy, cheap, or more horses....they became a state-of-the-art choice for decades.

The flat-six WEBER following is still quite strong, for whatever reason(s) and whether twin plug or crank fired, it still lives on amongst many today. My IM6 was built to spec by the ORIGINAL OWNER in the spirit of that ERA by SUPERTEC PERFORMANCE, one of the premier builders of 2.7 variants on planet earth. Mind you, the car was built in 2008 for over $100K AND the owner could very EASILY have picked an MFI/CIS/CARB set up that fancied him...but he chose WEBERS.....in the spirit of his historical perspective and choice, now MINE!

So YES...ORIGINAL to his build/now MY CAR/ in the spirit of 70s HISTORY. IRONY, yes, but I find comfort in that spirit AND that mint WEBERS(3 barrels as per 2.7) go for up to 10K today. Of course one could have a custom EFI with magnesium/titanium throttles made for 25k...NONE of which was around back in the 70s either. FOLKS are still building 2.7s with WEBERS just as many 914/VW owners have trashed their MFIs for CARBS. I choose to have a 12 volt battery in my FAKE PORSCHE like thousands of others despite the fact that they were NOT original either along with transistor ignition, etc. 

Despite the fact that the ZENITHS and SOLEXES were considered crapola by the PORSCHE-O-FILES and that 3 barrel WEBERS were originally a FERRARI choice for their six cylinder DINOs, they do hold a FIRM place in FLAT SIX LORE....

Right now I'm not up to twin plugging and EFIing my car for another 25K despite the amazing performance upgrade with its state-of-the-art tune.....indeed a GREAT spec for a 2.7 as you indicate.

IRONIC....indeed

I do agree with you that Zeniths and Solexes are absolute piles of dung. Webers were and are a clear improvement over them.

I chose to build my Spyder MY way, it has many oddities and peculiarities that other people don't like.

I simply don't care.

It is painted white(not silver), I guess I should be shot! It has Webers and a type 1, and crankfire ignition, along with a cable shifter and disc brakes all around. It's a replica, built my way to my vision and other than the general shape and appearance there isn't much in common with the original. And it will spank the doors off a lot of cars but especially the one it replicates. Kind of like your IM-6 Speedster, eh? 

DannyP posted:

I do agree with you that Zeniths and Solexes are absolute piles of dung. Webers were and are a clear improvement over them.

I chose to build my Spyder MY way, it has many oddities and peculiarities that other people don't like.

I simply don't care.

It is painted white(not silver), I guess I should be shot! It has Webers and a type 1, and crankfire ignition, along with a cable shifter and disc brakes all around. It's a replica, built my way to my vision and other than the general shape and appearance there isn't much in common with the original. And it will spank the doors off a lot of cars but especially the one it replicates. Kind of like your IM-6 Speedster, eh? 

YOU know your stuff...thats for sure and will certainly blow the doors off of many, including mine despite the six. Smart doing discs all around as important to be able to stop that rocket. Mine is fairly quick AND I would NOT own an original....slow as sh*t and will rust if you spit on it.....but I'm happy with mine despite that small/infinitesmal rascally flat spot

I have to say that I’m pleased with the EFI 3.6 in my car , as much as I liked my previous carbureted speedsters.  I also have grown to like the engine management system, though I thought it had no place in a car such as this.  The car is basic enough in all other ways to allow me to accept some technological advancements.  

 

Bob: IM S6 posted:

I have to say that I’m pleased with the EFI 3.6 in my car , as much as I liked my previous carbureted speedsters.  I also have grown to like the engine management system, though I thought it had no place in a car such as this.  The car is basic enough in all other ways to allow me to accept some technological advancements.  

 

Or,

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×
×